Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Feb-18-2019
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.4763-4764 OF2013TAMIL NADU POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STERLITE INDUSTRIES (I) LTD. & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 8773-8774 OF2013CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 9542-9543 OF2013CIVIL APPEAL No.5782 OF2014CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 1552-1554 OF2019CIVIL APPEAL No.23 OF2019CIVIL APPEAL No.1582 OF2019JUDGMENT R.F. NARIMAN, J.1. The present appeals arise out of orders that have been passed by the National Green Tribunal [NGT]. dated 31.05.2013, 08.08.2013, 1 and 15.12.2018. The brief facts necessary to appreciate the controversy raised in the present case are as follows.2. The respondent, Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. / Vedanta Ltd., was operating a copper smelter plant at the State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu Ltd. (SIPCOT) Industrial Complex at Thoothukudi, Tamil Nadu. On 01.08.1994, the respondent received a No-Objection Certificate [NOC]. from the Tamil Nadu Pollution C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-07-2019
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2530 OF2012Birla Institute of Technology .Appellant(s) VERSUS The State of Jharkhand & Ors. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. On 07.01.2019, this Court placing reliance on the decision of this Court in Ahmadabad Pvt. Primary Teachers Association vs. Administrative Officer and Others (2004) 1 SCC755 which was brought to the 1 Courts notice by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the High Court.2. However, after the pronouncement of the order in this appeal, it came to the notice of this Court that consequent upon the decision of this Court rendered in Ahmadabad Pvt. Primary Teachers Association (supra), the Parliament amended the definition of the word employee as defined in Section 2(e) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 by Amending Act No.47 of 2009 on 31.12.2009 with retrospective effect from 03.04.1997. This amendment was no...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-07-2019
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1123 OF2010ASHOKSINH JAYENDRASINH ..Appellant STATE OF GUJARAT ..Respondent VERSUS JUDGMENT R. BANUMATHI, J.This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 05.03.2009 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No.10 of 2001 in and by which the High Court affirmed the conviction of appellant-accused No.1 under Section 302 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and the sentence of life imprisonment imposed upon him. The High Court also affirmed the conviction of the appellant under Section 307 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and under Section 25(c) of the Arms Act and the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon him. The High Court acquitted the appellant for the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 1 2. Brief facts which led to filing of this appeal are:- On 23.11.1997 at about 09.00 PM, accused Nos.1 to 5 along wit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-14-2019
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.10194 OF2013STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS Respondent(s) S.K. SINGH & ORS. IA No.88765/2018 WITH C.A. No.1317 of 2015 C.A. No.11307 of 2013 IA No.7/2016 JUDGMENT SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.Civil Appeal No.10194/2013 1. The dispute pertains to the Irrigation Department cadre of the Uttarakhand State, for promotion from the post of Junior Engineer (for short JE) to the post of Assistant Engineer (for short AE), with two groups of these JEs arrayed on opposite sides one having the 1 qualification of Diploma and the other having the qualification of Degree in Engineering. The promotion quota (the promotion quota is for AEs - they are also being directly recruited) has carved out a provision for accelerated promotion to the extent of 7.33% for the JEs holding a more advanced qualification, of a Degree in Civil Engineering, with which the JEs holding a qualification of Diploma are aggrieved. F...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-04-2019
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 937 OF2011FAINUL KHAN ...APPELLANT(S) STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER VERSUS WITH ...RESPONDENT(S) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 938 OF2011SAINUL KHAN ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENT(S) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 939 OF2011MIR SHAUKAT ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT NAVIN SINHA, J.The appellants are aggrieved by their conviction under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) sentencing them to rigorous imprisonment for life, along with conviction 1 under Sections 323/149 and 147 IPC, sentencing them to varied terms of imprisonment under the same. The sentences have been directed to run concurrently.2. The occurrence is said to have taken place on 01.11.1983 at about 06.30 PM. The accused were variously armed with spears and lathis. P.W. 7 and 8 are stated to be injured eye witnesses. P.W6also claimed to be an eye wi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-14-2019
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL/CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Review Petition (Crl.) No.46 of 2019 IN Writ Petition (Crl.) No.298 of 2018 YASHWANT SINHA & ORS. .Petitioners Versus .Respondents INTERVENTION APPLICATION, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Through its DIRECTOR & ANR. (I.A. No.69008/2019 CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, I.A. No.69006/2019 I.A. No.71047/2019 PRODUCTION OF RECORDS and I.A. No.69009/2019 STAY APPLICATION) WITH MA582019 in W.P.(Crl.) No.225/2018 (PIL-W) (I.A. No.182576/2018 CORRECTION OF MISTAKES IN THE JUDGMENT) R.P.(Crl.) No.122/2019 in W.P.(Crl.) No.297/2018 (PIL-W) 1 No.29248/2019 CRIMINAL INITIATING MA4032019 in W.P.(Crl.) No.298/2018 (PIL-W) (I.A. PROCEEDINGS U/S340OF CRPC) R.P.(C) No.719/2019 in W.P.(C) No.1205/2018 (PIL-W) CONMT.PET.(Crl.) No.3/2019 in R.P.(Crl.) No.46/2019 in W.P.(Crl.) No.298/2018 (PIL-W) (I.A. No.63168/2019 EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., I.A. No.71678/2019 EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and I.A. No.66253/2019 EXEMPTION FROM F...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-17-2019
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.576 OF2016INDIAN HOTEL AND RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION (AHAR) & ANR. .....APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. .....RESPONDENT(S) W I T H WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.24 OF2017A N D WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.119 OF2017JUDGMENT A.K. SIKRI, J.This batch of three Writ Petitions was heard together and is being disposed of by this Common Judgment as similar issues and prayers are raised in all these petitions.2) The instant writ petitions have been preferred under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, challenging certain provisions of the Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels, Restaurant and Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women (Working therein) Act, 2016 (hereinafter 2 referred to as the Act) and also the Rules framed there under being the Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels, Restaurant and Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women (Working therein)...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-10-2019
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3934 OF2017RAM PARSHOTAM MITTAL & ORS. APPELLANTS VERSUS HOTEL QUEEN ROAD PVT. LTD. & ORS. RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3935 OF2017JUDGMENT ARUN MISHRA, J.1. The appeal arises out of the judgment dated 31.5.2013 passed by the High Court of Delhi, setting aside an order dated 31.1.2006 passed by the Company Law Board in Company Petition No.64/2005.2. The backdrop facts indicate that the Government of India took a policy decision on 5.7.2002 to disinvest its shares in the Indian Tourism Development Corporation (in short, the ITDC) which owns various hotel properties; one of them being Indraprastha Hotel, formerly known as Hotel Ashok Yatri Niwas, (hereinafter referred to as the hotel).3. In terms of an approved scheme of Arrangement of Demerger the hotel was transferred to the Respondent No.1 Hotel Queen Road Pvt. 2 Ltd. (in short, HQRL) which was created as a Special Purpose Vehicle to enable ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jul-12-2019
NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 1890 OF2011PRATAP SINGH @ PIKKI ..Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF UTTARAKHAND ..Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Rastogi, J.1. The appellant(accused No.1) along with three others tried for an offence under Sections 147, 148, 302/149 and 323/149 of the Indian Penal Code(hereinafter being referred to as IPC). The appellant and one Vikas Kirola were convicted under Section 304 Part II/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and other two persons Manoj Singh Rautela and 1 Deepak Pathak were acquitted vide judgment dated 12th January, 1998.2. Both the unsuccessful convicted persons preferred criminal appeal against the judgment dated 12th January, 1998 before the High Court of Uttarakhand. In the case of appellant, the High Court observed that according to his marksheet of Secondary School Certificate Examination 1993, his date of birth is 13th June, 1977 while the incident was o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jul-30-2019
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE Civil Appeal No(s). 5943-5945 of 2019 (@SLP(C) Nos. 28719-28721 of 2015) Indsil Hydro Power & Manganese Ltd Appellant(s) Versus State of Kerala & Ors Etc Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J12 Leave granted. These appeals arise from the judgment of a Division Bench of the High Court of Kerala dated 21 August 2015. The High Court has dismissed the writ proceedings instituted by the appellant under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3 On 7 December 1990, the State of Kerala issued G.O (Ms) No.23/90/PD by which private entities were permitted to construct and operate Hydel Power Projects for the generation of power, subject to certain conditions. These conditions, broadly speaking were: The Private Agencies would be allowed to set up sanctioned hydel schemes at their own cost. Where the power scheme is located in an area owned by the 2 Respondents, the land would be leased for a period of 30...
Tag this Judgment!